SCOTX validates Pressley's concerns

You should read the whole thing for yourself; the TL,DR version is that the Supreme Court said Pressley raised very valid questions in her election challenge, but that they whole thing is so far in the past that they're not going to do anything about it.

It's similar to the ruling in the Wallace Hall case: validate the argument, then hide behind a technicality.

Non-lawyer opinion: SCOTX's reasoning seems less farcical here than the Hall case. The term of the seat for which the election contest was originally filed really did expire two years ago. Refer all your other questions to lawyers.

Casar and his buddies will spin this as a win. But it's not. Their macro-strategy is to smear people asking difficult questions as lunatics. And SCOTX did them no favors there.

Bottom Line: Not everything we wanted, but it's a useful building block....